One more tidbit I do need to ad. The source for this blast on O'reilley is Media Matters. Who in this blog knows who Media Matters is? Raise your hands...well since I can't see you I will tell you. Media Matters is a front group for the Democrat party started by a close associate of the Clintons. Their purpose is to "expose" false and misleading information in the media. However they rarely if ever expose anything other than what they consider conservative misinformation. Anything that comes from Media Matters should be treated with serious skepticism since neutrality is not their forte.

This connects to next comment

Jacqueline @ 1:13 You made a comment the pro-lifers are normally pro- death penalty and what a inconsistency this seems to be. Is it just me that notices that most pro-abortionists are anti the death penalty? Based on your logic isn't that equally inconsistent? Further Pro-Choice folks claim to be all about choice yet what choice does the father or the child have in the process? Isn't it really about given all the power of choice to the woman rather than being for choice in general?
@ 2:16 you made reference to Outfoxed. A propaganda piece I personally have not seen because I have not watched a movie in over 10 years. However here is something you may want to consider: The owner of Fox, Rupert Murdoch, has hosted fund raisers for (D) Hillary Clinton and (D) Chuck Shumer. Hardly sounds like a conservative ideologue.
Kristina @ 3:15 you discussed the importance of planning for an unwanted pregnancy. You are exactly what pro-lifers have hoped and prayed would never happen in this country. I am sorry you think it is ok to preplan for abortion.
Anonymous @ 3:33 you made reference to Pro-Choice folks doing more to lower abortions than anyone else, please read my comments to Emily and let me add further that since those evil Pro-Lifers have had control of the Federal government there has been a steady decrease in abortions. Coincidence? Maybe.

As I read through these comments I found myself disbelieving that people could be so misinformed.

Jen1 @ 1:19 you listed about a paragraph of programs that the government should be providing for you. The founders would role over in their graves to think that government would be providing such things. This is the purpose of parents not government. Besides with a 4.3 - 7 trillion dollar debt where are we going to come up with the money to pay for? Maybe your grandkids can be mortgaged like your kids already are so you can have your free lunch?

Jen1 @ 3:01 you liken Fox News with Hitler propaganda. You should be ashamed for typing such hateful rhetoric. The rest of this blog should condemn this. Further O'reilley has never said Iraq had anything to do with 9-11 and the argument for the war also never claimed a link. The reason we attacked Iraq according to Bush, the CIA and MI5 is that Iraq was making weapons of mass destruction. There was major concern he would give those weapons to terrorists. We never "Found" the weapons but you should know that does not mean they never existed. As to your comment about the health dangers to women while I agree that O'reilley's coments were ignorant could you please provide some statistics on the number of women who have died as a result of labor in the last 20 years rather than just insulting him? It would certainly bolster your case.

Emily @ 12:35 you made comments regarding the need to educate. Last I knew sex ed was required in every school in the nation. Further since we dropped the barriers and began to teach such "enlightened" lessons abortions have only increased. Today there are more abortions performed, by far, than ever were when it was abstinence only education. You show great ignorance by arguing for taking the moral barriers down as a way to decrease the consequences that come from poor morals.

See Next Post

Abortion is a moral issue and you shouldn't be allowed to legislate morality. That is something that should be taught at home.
Birth control does not always work. I know I had three 3 unplanned pregnancies and 1 planned pregnancy, 3 surviving children and child died after 6 days. After my last pregnancy I got pregnant again and the doctor said I could maybe have the child but the chances of survival of either of us were minimal. I had a husband and 3 healthy children. If you were given that choice do you think you would make any other choice. I don't. Sometimes they are medically necessary.

I and hundred millions of people watch O'reilly every day. People and especially students who are major in business, law or political science field can learn a lot from him (even High shool students).

I admire him for quick thinking, provide so much facts and shows two sides of view. In the end, O'reilly told us we decide, not him. There are some who still hate him for exposing them in front millions of people and/or jealousing of his successul radio and TV talk show.

I think that Bill O'riely is a pompus jerk that doesn't know what the hell he's talking about, I mean come on he's a guy how much could he possibly know on the subject? There are in some cases situations where an abortion is necesary.

Thanks Michelle. Emily, great post. And 11:50 am Anon brings up a great point which is that there are many many many kids hoping to be adopted. To say just put it up for adoption does not make sense when there are so many kids in foster homes, including toddlers an infants. (I have a friend who is the director of a private adoption/foster care/therapy agency and every time I see her she tries to hook me up with a child, usually a very young one. I have also seen the older kids bounce from home to home to home, sometimes at the rate of every six weeks. They do that all without even a suitcase provided by the government agency who is their legal guardian. A private organization started donating luggage for the kids.) Is there a wait for adoption? Sure, mostly for white infants. Add in all the legal stuff and that accounts for the average wait time, not lack of children who need homes. Most foster parents do not even get enough money from the government to cover the expenses they take on.

I also see that the women who do have multiple abortions over time was brought up and the idea of limiting the number you can have. Well let me ask you this: Do you really want a woman who has repeatedly decided that she does not want children and who perhaps is very irresponsible raising a child? I'm going to guess no. But I'm also going to point out that the lack of programs to aid parents in need, the lack of programs promoting contraceptives, the lack of available counseling to lower income families means that once that woman DOES have a child you don't want to help her then either. The disdain that a person feels and is treated with when they do take governmental help...well, I guess some people must turn others into pariahs no matter what their choices are.

Yay, Jacqueline and Emily. Good for you both!

WIERD! I was actually going to post how much I like the way you think! Great minds and all that... I was afraid it would have been considered "off topic".

Nice to see US Weekly making good use of their posting blockers/filters on the mud-slinging posts.

It is very interesting to me that people don't realize that the Pro-Choice movement has done more to lower the abortion rate than the pro-life movement could ever dream of. The reasoning behind this is that 90% of pro-life organizations (feel free to check my facts)are AGAINST contraception. They don't always publish this info - but ask them the straight truth and they will admit it. Without contraception there is no hope to lower the abortion rate. As much as people wish it were true, pre-marital, unprotected sex will never end. Let's try encouraging people to be safe rather than trying to drown them in "moral" propaganda.

If you give money to the pro-life organizations that don't support contraception then you are throwing your money away. How, pray tell, do they really plan on lowering the abortion rate? It's not working.

Anon 3:04, please don't paint all Americans with the same brush. Stay on track and understand that the enemy is not Americans but O'Reilly. He and his non-fact based opinion are the subject of these discussions and becoming emotional and irrational is not condusive to a contructive discussion on abortion and Mr. O'Reilly.

Instead give us your p.o.v. on O'Reilly's comments concerning abortion and your own feelings in reagrd to abortion. But pleasedo not a rant about America and the poor spelling abilities of Anon 1:51pm (no matter how poor his/her abilities may be).

Anonymous...I don't think this conversation is about grammer, but if you're that anal I'll try a little harder to spell things correctly. Interesting that you would move the conversation to a personal insult. Obviously you are not skilled in the art of arguing. You see, often when people are losing an argument they will turn the discussion to something personally insulting and clearly irrelevant. I see this is the case here.

I'm done anyway. I know that the majority of the US readers are intelligent and even if they don't agree with abortion they can see that Bill O'Reilly has only made himself look stupid. I don't have a problem with people who think abortion is wrong, only with people who think Bill O'Reilly is someone who knows what he is talking about. The man scares the heck out of me, simply because there are so many people out there that believe what he says.

By the way, I have two unveristy degrees, and when I want to use proper grammer, in a setting that demands it (i.e. essays) then I really have no trouble doing it....and i'm Canadian so I think you may want to re-examine why the world has a problem with Americans. I'm pretty sure it has nothing to do with grammer and spelling.

Anonymous 2:51 what the heck are you talking about? who is a lawyer? Me? nope not me....I can't even tell what you stand for except I can probably guess since you used the 'evil' word liberal (did you know in Canada we have a whole party named the Liberals? And they are the centerist party...so don't ever come here)

why don't you actually try using a name and own your opinion....or at least make your opinion clear, instead of sounding like some weird paranoid neo nazi

I'm pregnant with my first child and I'm scared as hell! I'm grateful that I'm having a healthy pregnancy so far but so many other women aren't so fortunate! I think Mr. Bill "Over Opinionated" O'Reilly should have a uterus put in him and be inpregnated and become subject to all those health risks before he blabs another word about this issue!

We have extremist are living among us. Taxpayers are tired us of paying for or awarding this kind of behavior. Health care are on the rise, and company cannot survive for doing business in America; the fact is, just look at businesses have been moving out of Cal, and USA looses jobs to oversea.

Who are these people are constantly talking on Internet? be aware of they are lawyers. These liberal lawyers are well paid and can turn any thing from black to white. These liberal lawyers condone your children's bad and irresponsible behavior. But they will not let it happen to their kids, because These people, their kids are well protected, but they don't care about yours.

It's at your children and yours lost, but they are winning for running these programs.